IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bmwg] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Fri, 11 February 2022 12:22 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 905553A0A2A; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 04:22:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id arPxEkU6vPGe; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 04:22:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr1-x431.google.com (mail-wr1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D80303A0BEC; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 04:22:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr1-x431.google.com with SMTP id u1so1180429wrg.11; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 04:22:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=TL6jW4UaIPRzm4CC5RfcDswpXJEnix7v91d8l6uw/E8=; b=URoxGER5cNjX6sxkH7C83UF8no9vIWP0EREoLFqSlsECfGJfTCCGRIqKGuq6QagovX iJmryPcG5xxx8X1OEUHpbYFFZRjlXuR4xLhDlB5RZ4HeM7/e5jCsxV2gjgeb25FvGG6b 0TtorCNLxF31Zoa9k8JwyrSQ3s+/9S0C4s0RBmsWsfpKcBLQLs1pMfTe1ox5wjYmRMeK YjJ08Bv3V/fOdENNlBTWLk1E5hFzYKd3c52hbejAkZra6CXoGWxzLmV/CemD1q7oF76g bLIf+ucdxIxBEmZf4G9ZNtrfQTYM9AeE8etChLwSbrIBunPratLszICCgFv0c2t0gkFo tmsQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=TL6jW4UaIPRzm4CC5RfcDswpXJEnix7v91d8l6uw/E8=; b=yHJfnrV6fw6tRJWWaB9yN22qwJMrfYO1XRqGU2i9J7eUq2qswti5sMOCaZ7XYG8yP2 M78EmpPSQZdsl9RleSPjsbkDVIKddwnAPIfHEuyb4I/UdXsZz/5EUEQqQxzhxhAK12UK e1V6qh+dGoftmwwCDp6ylJwPyMu8i/g2UfyoM13O1nOM2GMSrCLVvZOfN559L03b92gO FQp8abLYR7sU5fj4822Qhsm3JRlZqw8LoHLgVcb/iH4gTu36OZlXcq3ROOmfCrIZ4pYj Ue+depgE3LXIFI+9zHqBngKAr3KqAccXy40if1Vrnx4OAs3+BuoH6KudInBJjOq11MQ7 0ANA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531pZ6PFDH1POuiYzaag1OyWnZ5wk1SkYWyLXrbXCPiz6A/ynClM DS0kzNX1lzY3BjzEAtPzNlM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy2OdS9RPV8kUfP05gM6aUowvGWdl2ybGV9clrL/Jbarrg7azmVTECG8CzO+HxpSQjSafhV0w==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:914c:: with SMTP id j70mr1212393wrj.646.1644582131343; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 04:22:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([85.255.232.63]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f2sm3214738wri.49.2022.02.11.04.22.10 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Feb 2022 04:22:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <5AAFE998-739E-48DA-B82D-2FBCD5989E42@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_54ABE362-5BF4-4FB5-97C3-00143E95E26B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 12:22:09 +0000
In-Reply-To: <01D0C656-F323-4A7A-BF5B-764D646E2CD8@sobco.com>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, bmwg-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, bmwg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance@ietf.org
To: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>
References: <164386586568.20734.14136987065393258244@ietfa.amsl.com> <fdb1df79-3a53-ea53-8532-ffb8d2545996@eantc.de> <CAL0qLwaDu9U1Kj_GtgNEY6JWpJncyC-t=NYA_uwOHs8zZmCHpQ@mail.gmail.com> <01D0C656-F323-4A7A-BF5B-764D646E2CD8@sobco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/r1DobsAhL1OpO96EmQZfwMwDJbg>
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bmwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 12:22:20 -0000


> On 11 Feb 2022, at 12:08, Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
> 
> I do not think it is useful to use SHOULD without specifically saying what the escape clause is - 
> i.e. specifically say when its OK to not act as if it was a MUST

Hi Scott

The problem with that is it requires perfect foresight on the exceptions.

I have always taken SHOULD to mean that you MUST do this unless you have a good reason not to do this and understand the consequences for your system in its deployment environment.

In other words I think we need to trust the engineer implementing the system to apply good judgement when they ignore the MUST element of the SHOULD.

- Stewart

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email